Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T08:34:18.014Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Biological motion perception

from Part IV - Perceptual and cognitive development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2017

By
Lara Bardi
Edited by
Brian Hopkins ,
Elena Geangu  and
Sally Linkenauger
Brian Hopkins
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Elena Geangu
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Sally Linkenauger
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Child Development , pp. 271 - 276
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Further reading

Bonatti, L., Frot, E., Zangle, R., & Mehler, J. (2002). The human first hypothesis: Identification of conspecifics and individuation of objects in the young infant. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 388–426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, P.J., & Shipley, T.F. (2009). Event-related potentials to point-light displays of human actions in five-month-old infants. Developmental Neuropsychology, 34, 368–377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pavlova, M.A. (2012). Biological motion processing as a hallmark of social cognition. Cerebral Cortex, 22, 981–995.Google Scholar
Shiffrar, M., & Thomas, J.P. (2013). Beyond the scientific objectification of the human body: Differentiated analyses of human motion and object motion. In Rutherford, M.D. & Kuhlmeier, V.A. (Eds.), Social perception: Detection and interpretation of animacy, agency, and intention (pp. 83–108). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

References

Allison, T., Puce, A., & McCarthy, G. (2000). Social perception from visual cues: Role of the STS region. Trends in Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 267–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bardi, L., Regolin, L., & Simion, F. (2011). Biological motion preference in humans at birth: Role of dynamic and configural properties. Developmental Science, 14, 353–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bardi, L., Regolin, L., & Simion, F. (2014). The first time ever I saw your feet: Gravity bias in newborns’ sensitivity to biological motion. Developmental Psychology, 50, 985–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardi, L., Di Giorgio, E., Lunghi, M., Troje, N., & Simion, F. (2015). Walking direction triggers visuo-spatial orienting in 6-month-old infants and adults: An eye tracking study. Cognition, 141, 112–120.Google Scholar
Bertenthal, B.I., Proffitt, D.R., & Kramer, S.J. (1987). Perception of biomechanical motions by infants: Implementation of various processing constraints. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 13, 577–585.Google ScholarPubMed
Bidet-Ildei, C., Kitromilides, E., Orliaguet, J.P., Pavlova, M., & Gentaz, E. (2014). Preference for point-light human biological motion in newborns: Contribution of translation displacement. Developmental Psychology, 50, 113–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christie, T., & Slaughter, V. (2010). Movement contributes to infants’ recognition of the human form. Cognition, 114, 329–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, R., & McDaniel, C. (1982). The perception of biological motion by human infants. Science, 218, 486–748.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M.H. (2006). Biological motion: A perceptual life detector? Current Biology, 16, R376–R377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, D.G., Goodwin, J.E., George, R., Axelsson, E.L., & Braddick, F.M.B. (2007). Infants perceive human point-light displays as solid forms. Cognition, 104, 377–396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morton, J., & Johnson, M.H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition. Psychological Review, 98, 164–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinto, J. (2006). Developing body representations: A review of infants’ responses to biological motion displays. In Knoblich, G., Thornton, I.M., Grosjean, M., & Shiffrar, M. (Eds.), Human body perception from the inside out (pp. 305–322). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reid, V.M., Hoehl, S., & Striano, T. (2006). The perception of biological motion by infants: An event-related potential study. Neuroscience Letters, 395, 211–214.Google Scholar
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Review Neuroscience, 2, 661–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rugani, R., Rosa Salva, O., Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, G. (2015). Brain asymmetry modulates perception of biological motion in newborn chicks (Gallus gallus). Behavioural Brain Research, 290, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanefuji, W., Ohgami, H., & Hashiya, K. (2008). Detection of the relevant type of locomotion in infancy: Crawlers versus walkers. Infant Behavior and Development, 31, 624–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlottmann, A., & Ray, E. (2010). Goal attribution to schematic animals: Do 6-month-olds perceive biological motion as animate? Developmental Science, 13, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simion, F., Regolin, L., & Bulf, H. (2008). A predisposition for biological motion in the newborn baby. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 15, 809–813.Google Scholar
Troje, N.F., & Westhoff, C. (2006). The inversion effect in biological motion perception: Evidence for a “life detector”? Current Biology, 16, 821–824.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vallortigara, G., Regolin, L., & Marconato, F. (2005). Visually inexperienced chicks exhibit spontaneous preference for biological motion patterns. PLoS Biology, 3, 1312–1316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×